On 4/28/2017 10:26 AM, Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 11:14:24AM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >> 27/04/2017 11:25, Bruce Richardson: >>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 03:01:04AM -0400, Qi Zhang wrote: >>>> Vector PMD is not designed for i686 orginally, but it still can be active >>>> with i686 compile option. >>>> Below are observed failure when vPMD is invovled on i686 >>>> (but may not limited to) >>>> >>>> 1) memory overwrite when assign 2 mbuf points to rx return points. >>>> _mm_storeu_si128((__m128i *)&rx_pkts[pos+2], mbp2) >>> >>> Is this a serious issue that prevents us using the driver? I think it's been >>> in the code for quite some time. Can it not be relatively easily fixed for >>> 32-bit builds? >>> >>>> >>>> 2) rearm_data is not 16 bytes aligned that cause general-protection >>>> exception >>>> _mm_store_si128((__m128i *)&rx_pkts[0]->rearm_data, rearm0); >>>> >>> >>> Good catch. I think this is also an easy fix. My preferred fix is to >>> explicitly align the rearm data on a 16-byte boundary. It would add some >>> padding to the middle of cacheline0 of the mbuf, but given that we >>> explicitly move other data to cacheline1, we will have padding on 32-bit >>> anyway, be it in the middle or the end of the mbuf cachelines. >>> >>>> So the patch set will exclude Vector PMD from compile with i686 configure. >> >> Please try to fix the drivers instead of turning them off. > > The patch for alignment of physical addresses should fix these issues, > removing the need for these patches.
Patches marked as rejected, Thanks for the fix Bruce! > > /Bruce >
